|
|
|
August 04, 2008
Obama Be
Team Obama has figured out a way to stop his slide in the polls. Summer Camp. The BHO campaign has sent out emails to me and probably millions of other lucky recipients encouraging us to sign up for a local "Camp Obama" (my.barackobama.com/page/s/campobamaus, my.barackobama.com/page/s/campobama08la), a two-day session where we'd learn how to be effective organizers for the campaign. Hopefully a citizen reporter will sign up to report back with a critical eye, but for now all we have are the positive and very many negative connotations brought to mind. You can see a full copy of the email here, and if you want to be creeped out even more see the description of last year's "camps" here:Did some one say Clone Wars?Rivals of Obama know that while he may at times appear to channel Martin Luther King Jr., his methods sometimes give evidence of his allegiance to [Saul Alinsky], who shunned starry-eyed idealists and recommended purging do-gooders from organizations. Alinsky wanted results. And his methods often forced the hands of elected officials... It's not enough to want to help others, [an Obama campaign staffer] says. These campers need to focus on people's self-interests. What do they want? How can Obama help them? ..."We want you to stop thinking about Barack Obama and be Barack Obama," she says. Obama has taken Mau-Mauing The Flak Catchers and turned it into a national campaign. Can you say reparations? So let us have a look at Alinsky's handbook Rules For Radicals RULE 1:"Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have." Power is derived from 2 main sources - money and people. "Have-Nots" must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)That would explain a lot of the current campaign's dynamics. Obama is running on the idea that a lot of people fear being called racists. If that fear is not there then his campaign has no power. McCain has neutered that whole line of attack. It may play well among the latte liberals (Tom Wolfe called them the radical chic  ) but it will not play well against the original anti-slavery party (Abe Lincoln was a Republican).RULE 2: "Never go outside the expertise of your people." It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don't address the "real" issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)This would explain Obama's One note campaign: "I'm Black. Vote for me or we will brand you a racist." All his other policy positions are amendable (see flip-flop, Obama). Obama might not know math, science, economics, or any number of other things. He does know race and so does his base.
RULE 3: "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy." Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)Again. This may work for latte liberals but Clinton supporters (whose husband was touted as the first "black" President) are not buying it. Did I mention that Republicans were the original anti-racist party?
RULE 4: "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules." If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity's very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)There may be racists in the Republican Party (as there are racists in the Democrat Party). McCain is not one of them. His strength is as the strength of ten because his heart is pure.
RULE 5: "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon." There is no defense. It's irrational. It's infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)This has been turned against Obama with McCain's "Paris Hilton" ad and his "The One" ad.
RULE 6: "A good tactic is one your people enjoy." They'll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They're doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that any other human being. We all avoid "un-fun" activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)Evidently the Obama Campaign and his mighty minions love calling people racists. I don't see any fun in that. Only sadness. However, to each his own.
RULE 7: "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag." Don't become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)So far the Obama campaign has been a one note campaign. Besides any tactic that is over used wears out its welcome. The "cry wolf" syndrome. I wonder which way they can turn now? The post racialist candidate has been branded a racialist. Where do they go from here?
RULE 8: "Keep the pressure on. Never let up." Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)Well they have to find pressure points. Places where the pressure is effective. So what are Obama's choices? Anti-surge? The surge is working. McCain was way out front on that one. More drilling for oil? McCain was at least a month ahead of Obama on that one and Obama's statement was not unequivocal. He wants limited drilling. McCain placed no such limits on his policy. Higher taxes? That has been death for any candidate pushing that proposition hard. So what can he come up with that will keep his team on side and make advances on his opposition? This is going to be interesting to watch.
RULE 9: "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself." Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists' minds. The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)Ah yes. "We will call you a racist if you keep attacking our positions. How is that working out Barry? That threat is gone. He is going to have to come up with a new one. Fear of labeling McCain a war monger? I think Obama is weak on that. He called for pulling out of Iraq and attacks on Pakistan in August of 2007. He labeled McCain McSame. So what has Bush done? Well he has attacked the terrorists in Pakistan and threatened further attacks if Pakistan didn't straighten out. Preempting Obama's whole line on that front. I wonder if Bush and McSame are working together? They are both Republicans. What are the odds? In any case warmongering does not play well to Obama's base. He will have to tread lightly. So far he has not come out with "we were right all along" on this one. No need to remind the base about it, because for him it is a double edged sword.
RULE 10: "If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive." Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management's wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)How is that racism thing working out? McCain has refused to take the bait. In turn he has counter attacked making Obama look obsessed with race. And he is obsessed with race. Just read his books.
RULE 11: "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative." Never let the enemy score points because you're caught without a solution to the problem. (Old saw: If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have to have a compromise solution.)Of course the alternative to racism is the post racialist candidate. Obama needed to present himself as anti-racist not anti-white. He screwed the pooch on that one with this primary attacks on Clinton. Ooops.
RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)Well he has gone after McCain in particular AND the Republicans in general. McCain blunted the attack, and counter attacked. Republicans are not buying it at all. McCain, the fighter pilot, has gotten inside Obama's OODA loop. Something the Navy teaches fighter pilots to do. The OODA Loop, often called Boyd's Cycle, is a creation of Col. John Boyd, USAF (Ret.). Col. Boyd was a student of tactical operations and observed a similarity in many battles and campaigns. He noted that in many of the engagements, one side presented the other with a series of unexpected and threatening situations with which they had not been able to keep pace. The slower side was eventually defeated. What Col. Boyd observed was the fact that conflicts are time competitive.Elections are nothing if they are not time competitive. Evidently the "freezing of the opponent" that Alinsky recommends has not worked on McCain. He was not frozen. Once that happened McCain was operating inside Obama's decision loop. Evidently Boyd is beating Alinsky. Or to put it another way. The fighter pilot is beating the community organizer. As a Navy man myself, I'm not surprised. Cross Posted at Power and Control Welcome Instapundit readers. You might also like Obama's Axelrod Busted posted by Simon on 08.04.08 at 07:42 AM
Comments
I have never read the points above, but being a history major in college I have read the points in Mein Kampf. LYNNDH · August 4, 2008 12:51 PM The depth of evil in the Alinsky tactics can be easily summed up: at no point does he ask himself Is it good? Is it true? Nor does he encourage those he instructs to consider those questions. Assistant Village Idiot · August 4, 2008 03:48 PM (I posted this over at 'Brothers Judd blog' earlier today. That I read someone saying similar things on the very day tells me we are definitely onto something.) The ObaMessiah's campaign analysis that the vast majority of Americans will still cringe in fear like cheap cellophane on a stove whenever it is even being HINTED that they are racist, and thus cave to the accuser and plead their "diversity" credentials, may be seriously flawed. This craveness I think WAS once the case. But BO's having come as far as he has has ironically changed that. Not only have we (America) proven we are NOT racist by this candidacy, but all of a sudden, we know it, we've proven it, and so ya know what?? We ain't even gonna LISTEN to the putzes who hurl the accusation every day with their morning coffee. In a nutshell, all of a sudden we just don't care if someone accuses us. We aren't, yap yap yap, take it to someone who gives a damn. So as long as BO and Co continue to hurl the charge, even subtly, all they are going to do is piss more and more people off, as we no will longer cower at the charge the way we used to. This is a magnificent turn of events, one that I sincerely hope spreads to the rest of the West that so sorely needs to act on it, passionately. Matter of fact...... thanks, Barack. I mean that. Sincerely. Andrew X · August 4, 2008 04:41 PM With the exception of physical activity; how is this Obama-camp any different from the Hitler Youth of Nazi Germany? Same basic premise: brain-wash the youth with slogans. David · August 4, 2008 04:42 PM To quote from the quote above, "Alinsky wanted results." Like Obama he was already convinced that he beliefs were the right beliefs, that his proposed results are both good and true. He's not going to waste any time convincing his opponents nor answering questions. The Alinsky method has taken over the Democratic Party. See, for instance, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, John Kerry, Al Gore, and Barak Obama. JorgXMcKie · August 4, 2008 04:58 PM To quote from the quote above, "Alinsky wanted results." Like Obama he was already convinced that he beliefs were the right beliefs, that his proposed results are both good and true. He's not going to waste any time convincing his opponents nor answering questions. The Alinsky method has taken over the Democratic Party. See, for instance, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, John Kerry, Al Gore, and Barak Obama. JorgXMcKie · August 4, 2008 05:00 PM McCain was not a fighter piolet. He drove attack aircraft (the A-4 Skyhawk) which is Navy talk for a bomber. J Burke · August 4, 2008 05:02 PM McCain was not a fighter piolet. He drove attack aircraft (the A-4 Skyhawk) which is Navy talk for a bomber. J Burke · August 4, 2008 05:02 PM Where you going with that thought, J.? tim maguire · August 4, 2008 05:14 PM The audacity of hope by any means necessary... monkeyfan · August 4, 2008 05:17 PM In addition to rockets and bombs, McCain's A-4 carried air-to-air missiles and a cannon, and a synonym for "attack aircraft" is "fighter-bomber," but it's nevertheless correct that the A-4's primary mission was attacking ground targets. And he and his fellow Navy officers style themselves "Naval aviators" rather than pilots. Beldar · August 4, 2008 05:19 PM Crap. You don't have to be a fighter pilot to know about Boyd and the OODA loop. I study it and Patton's theories about the use of armor behind the enemy's front lines in preparing for litigation. Letalis Maximus, Esq. · August 4, 2008 05:19 PM I was just talking yesterday about the OODA-loop affect McCain was having on Him and had to explain to several fellow Army officers what it was by directing them to a Wikipedia article. da kine · August 4, 2008 05:45 PM Also, who did HRC work for out of college? Saul Alinsky - you could look it up. sagavia · August 4, 2008 05:47 PM Not only don't you have to be a fighter pilot, the biggest early advocates of the OODA process were the Marines KG2V · August 4, 2008 05:53 PM OODA example from Wikipeida: Another tactical-level example can be found on the basketball court, where a player takes possession of the ball and must get past an opponent who is taller or faster. A straight dribble or pass is unlikely to succeed. Instead the player may engage in a rapid and elaborate series of body movements designed to befuddle the opponent and deny him the ability to take advantage of his superior size or speed. At a basic level of play, this may be merely a series of fakes, with the hope that the opponent will make a mistake or an opening will occur. But practice and mental focus may allow one to reduce the time scale, get inside the opponent's OODA loop, and take control of the situation - to cause the opponent to move in a particular way, and generate an advantage rather than merely reacting to an accident. edh · August 4, 2008 05:57 PM I watched an anti-war protest by Arabs across from the White House a couple years back against Israel in the Lebanon war. It was transparently no peace protest but a pro-Hezbollah protest. When the body of Muslims encountered counter-protestors, the Muslims always chanted accusations of racism toward anyone who opposed them. They know what buttons to push in Americans. The rules for radicals have gotten around. They're not just for lefties anymore. Tantor · August 4, 2008 06:00 PM Tantor -- I agree that the rules for radicals have gotten around. But I would argue that Islamists are lefties -- hard, hard lefties. Oppression is nearly always from the political left Molly · August 4, 2008 06:17 PM re: "Camp Obama" Is that "Camp" in the Batman sense? MB · August 4, 2008 06:34 PM Brett, After 24 years in the USN? You're joking, right? People who don't even know who their representatives are (unless someone tells them...and who to re-elect) will be the downfall of this country. Removing the "right" of societal leeches to vote would go a long way to getting rid of the incompetent jerks in congress (on both sides of the aisle) that are more interested in squandering OUR money to stay in power than do the "right thing(s)". punkindrublic · August 4, 2008 07:03 PM The attack strategy feels like a ripoff of L. Ron Hubbard's "Fair Game" policy book. Kaitian · August 4, 2008 07:38 PM Great post. I see enourmous hilarity in some of the rules. bad · August 4, 2008 07:52 PM The Army had some folks who used Boyd's OODA loop in the late 1970s, and called themselves Jedi Knights. Don Meaker · August 4, 2008 08:09 PM I checked the link to obama's website and it said that Camp Obama is now closed. Weird. They must have caught wind of the backlash it was creating in America. beth barnat · August 4, 2008 08:27 PM Not CampObama, but, for today, The Obama Archipelago. -cp cold pizza · August 4, 2008 08:35 PM Another blogger, on another topic (mandatory volunteerism) asked innocently if the people who went to these "camps" would get to wear colorful, distinctive shirts with colorful, distinctive insignias. The leaders and organizers could perhaps wear long black leather overcoats. Maybe I'm missing finely-tuned satire in the first comment, but I would suggest a peek at the 15th Amendment. I would support, though, a Heinlein-type society wherein you got to vote after you served in the military for a definite term (and were not dishonorably discharged). There's a compromise position: you get to vote only after you demonstrate that you know who or what you're voting for, and the consequences of adopting that person or position. Much as I support the system the way it is, it aggrieves me to see so many people voting with no idea of what they're voting for (John Edwards has a great haircut, Obama is such a good speech-reader, ...), and so many go to the voting booth and THEN decide how to vote. ZZMike · August 4, 2008 08:44 PM Having just re-read all of Boyd's stuff (in connection with some strategic thinking I am doing for work), it is hard not to note Alinsky's similarities to Boyd. Clearly, Alinsky had intuited (as had Sun Tzu, and Patton, and Guderian, and Bill Gates, and many many others) the process of how to win at any competition between intelligent entities. The fact that Alinsky was acting in a despicable cause does not make the achievement any less valid. The real challenge for conservatives, it would seem, would be to come up with a countervailing tactic that both cancels Alinsky's rules (by understanding them better than those who implement them, if not better than Alinsky himself) and turns any such conflict to advantage. Losers whine; winners work to outcompete their opponents. Jeff Medcalf · August 4, 2008 09:03 PM That web address is just too close to "Camp Obama Maus" for comfort. I've linked to your post here. Tried to trackback, but haloscan wasn't likin it. Fod · August 4, 2008 10:08 PM The depth of evil in the Alinsky tactics can be easily summed up: at no point does he ask himself Is it good? Is it true? Nor does he encourage those he instructs to consider those questions. I disagree. The evil is in Alinsky's ends, not necessarily his means. His "rules" are simply a tactical guide, like Machiavelli. Bozoer Rebbe · August 4, 2008 10:42 PM A modest proposal: Voting eligibility is dependent upon *actual* tax liability (no EITC) in the year you are voting at the level of office you are voting for: $3000 in Federal income or capital gains taxes to vote for President and members of Congress. $500 for state (if you have a State income tax), school levies if you pay property taxes. (This would immediately disenfranchise most welfare recipients, students, and other dead weight, er wards of the state, while simultaneously cleaning up education by removing the incentive to propagandize students. Mark · August 4, 2008 10:47 PM A modest proposal: Voting eligibility is dependent upon *actual* tax liability (no EITC) in the year you are voting at the level of office you are voting for: $3000 in Federal income or capital gains taxes to vote for President and members of Congress. $500 for state (if you have a State income tax), school levies if you pay property taxes. (This would immediately disenfranchise most welfare recipients, students, and other dead weight, er wards of the state, while simultaneously cleaning up education by removing the incentive to propagandize students.) Mark · August 4, 2008 10:49 PM The McCain ads didn't actually cause a shift in the race, although I think one has taken place: they crystallized what many people had been thinking in a humorous way so that many people could finally say out loud: It's all just hot air and b.s. The emperor has no clothes. Captured the zeitgeist, so to speak. But in terms of the actual election, I can't think of a better reason to vote against Obama than having to listen to years of every issue, every comment, every criticism being parsed for racism -- blatant, hidden, subconsious, coded or whatever. This is, as ever, meant to be a silver-bullet silencer: the mere suggestion that you might even subconciously, be saying or doing something racist, is meant to horrify you into silence. I'm sick of it already and it's still three months to election day. I already spent four years doing that -- it was called college at CUNY in the 1970s -- and the awful memory has never left me. I just absolutely do not want to spend four more years of my life listening to people look for racism under every rock. Diane · August 5, 2008 02:02 AM Well argued. Thanks for the insightful analysis. Any mention of OODA obliges me to point out Bill Whittle's top-notch essay Forty Second Boyd and the Big Picture, which some readers may not have had the pleasure of encountering yet. Highly recommended reading. an unrepentant kulak · August 5, 2008 02:43 AM I like the way you think Bozoer Rebbe. Modest proposal approved. 85Yota · August 5, 2008 04:32 AM Sorry, nothing wrong with your thinking Bozoer. But my comment should have been directed to Mark. Your modest proposal is approved Mark. Nice thinking. 85Yota · August 5, 2008 04:34 AM The Constitution guarantees no one's right to vote, leaving the eligibility requirements up to the several states. When the Constitution does address the franchise, it is to forbid using certain criteria for eligibility, such as race, sex, or age above eighteen. Brett · August 5, 2008 08:00 AM an unrepentant kulak, Thanks for that. I have read the essay. It is great. I'm going to read it again. Simon M. Simon · August 5, 2008 09:44 AM Jeff Medcalf and Bozoer Rebbe have convinced me of their position. Assistant Village Idiot · August 5, 2008 09:57 AM My pleasure. I figured you had probably seen it already, but maybe some others have not. It's quite a combination of razor-sharp analysis and morale booster all in one. an unrepentant kulak · August 5, 2008 11:18 AM The OODA loop is what the German blitzkrieg was able to get inside. I think then it was called 'gaining the initiative'. Keep them off balance. And Bill Whittle's essay is great. Mikey NTH · August 6, 2008 05:28 PM Slightly off topic but clicking over to Obama's summer camp I noticed that when the campaign is referring to Obama using initials it uses BHO all the time. I guess that to refer to Hussain as the middle name is okay if it eliminates sentences like "Want to volunteer for BO summer camp?" vanderleun · August 6, 2008 07:54 PM Then again maybe not. vanderleun · August 6, 2008 08:01 PM |
|
November 2008
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
November 2008
October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• "Will this put a stop to the idiotic rumors? Of course not!"
• Soothe The Monkeys • McCain Is Against Coal • All speech is like pornography! And libertarians don't exist! • The election is over, but the geographical literacy campaign continues • The Obama Economy - An Anecdote • cynically naive? • Criticism is not hatred • Marxing Off A Cliff • A time for hope?
Links
Site Credits
|
|
We must get the intelligentsia off the backs of the people.
One simple solution: as no right to vote exists (we have a bad habit of considering legally mandated privileges to be rights), all officeholders and recipients of government contracts, salaries and grants should be required to give up their voting privileges until they are out of office or off the payroll.
The ability to vote for one's livelihood is a very deep corruption. Even kindergarteners know this.